Sentencing
R v Boudreault: Imagine There's No Surcharge
What does it mean to say that a law is constitutional or not? What are we getting at when a label of constitutionality is attached to a law? Of course on one level, we are asking whether a particular provision violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [Charter] (or is vires) – a technical […]
R v Suter: The Difficulties of Sentencing
On June 29, 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada (the “Supreme Court”) delivered its ruling in R v Suter, 2018 SCC 34 [Suter], a case which, at its core, “raises critical questions about what can legitimately be considered as ‘relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender’” (Factum of the Appellant, […]
R v Jackson: A New Standard for Social Context in Sentencing Law
This guest post was contributed by third-year Osgoode Hall Law School student Jamie Shilton (JD, Class of 2019). No serious assessment of the Canadian criminal justice system would be complete without an observation that its normal, everyday functioning incarcerates vast and disproportionate numbers of Black and Indigenous peoples. In a recent article, Akwasi Owusu-Bempah and […]
A response to R v Boutilier and the Constitutionality of Indeterminate Sentences
The following post responds to Devon Kapoor’s earlier case comment, which can be found here. Mr. Kapoor’s insightful post discusses a central issue in R v Boutilier, 2017 SCC 64 [Boutilier]: whether indeterminate sentences, as outlined in section 753(4.1) of the Criminal Code RSC 1985, c C-46 [Code], are unconstitutional under section 12 of the […]
R v Boutilier: The Dangerous Offender Regime and the Spectre of Indeterminate Sentences
On December 21st, 2017, the Supreme Court released its decision in R v Boutilier, 2017 SCC 64 [Boutilier], which deals with a constitutional challenge to the dangerous offender scheme in the Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46 [the Code]. This post will discuss the case and offer insight into its importance. In particular, the post […]
Tran v Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) : Bringing Cohesion Between Criminal Sentencing and Immigration Law
In Tran v Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) 2017 SCC 50 [Tran], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) applied principles of statutory interpretation to answer two questions: First, does a ‘term of imprisonment’ under section 36(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2011, c 27 [IRPA] include conditional sentences? Second, is the […]
Canada’s Longest Recent Sentences and the Questions and Controversies of Consecutive Life Sentences
On February 17, 2017, Justice Gates of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench handed down what is being referred to as the “harshest” sentence in recent Canadian history, tied with Christien Bourque’s sentence in 2014. This disposition of three consecutive life sentences, which will render the offender ineligible to apply for parole for 75 years, […]
What is the Anthony-Cook “Public Interest Standard”? A New Canada-Wide Standard for Joint Submissions on Sentencing
Introduction In R v Anthony-Cook, 2016 SCC 43, the Supreme Court of Canada adopted the “public interest” standard that trial judges across Canada are to employ to asses a joint submission on sentencing. While the case seeks to provide greater clarity for courts, prosecutors, accused persons, and their counsel, understanding the standard and what […]
Justice Malcolm Rowe: An Introduction
On Monday, October 17th, Prime Minister Trudeau announced his first nominee to the Supreme Court of Canada: Justice Malcolm Rowe. Set to fill the seat of Justice Cromwell who retired from the Court in September, Justice Rowe—provided his nomination succeeds—will become the first appointee from Newfoundland and Labrador. To add to historic firsts, Justice Rowe […]